Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

An anonymous reader writes "For the first time in eight years, Sony has overtaken Nintendo on the total number of game consoles sold. Sony sold 18.7 million consoles in the last financial year, compared to Nintendo sales of 16.3 million. Sony's PlayStation 4 has emerged as the bestselling 'new-gen' console. But demand for Nintendo's Wii U — with its touchscreen controller — has lagged far behind the original Wii, which was the most popular hardware of the last generation."

Phones and tablets play different games. Console games rely on directional input, with a joystick and discrete action buttons. "Mobile" games, on the other hand, use a completely flat sheet of glass as the primary means of input, which is fine for single-button or point-and-click games but not so good for, say, a fighting game or a platformer with any sort of exploration element without a clip-on Bluetooth gamepad that I've never actually seen in use.

An advantage of consoles over touch-screen devices is that brick-and-mortar stores typically have a display through which users can evaluate the control scheme of at least one popular console game without having to pay just to try it. Case in point: Pixeline and the Jungle Treasure. I installed the free version on my first-generation Nexus 7 tablet, with the intent of buying the full version if I can stand the controls, and I kept missing jumps because I kept ending up pressing outside the area that the gam

I tried the freeware version of AirAttack HD. It treats the touch screen as a trackpad, which ends up very effective for a scrolling shmup that auto-fires. I imagine that other shooters originally designed for a trackball, such as Centipede, would translate similarly well. I'm just curious about games originally made for a joystick. Do any of the other games you mention have a freeware subset, so I can see how developers have handled those genres?

... and vegas puts all of that to shame with its slot machines and blackjack.
but I do think phones are the future for mobile consoles.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tr... [forbes.com]
I would say Iphone is getting closer to console numbers. In the above artical they estimate mobile developers are making $21,000 a year on apple. ($6,000 a year on and Android). As the phones get better and the games get more complex those number will rise. Currently I don't think mobile could support all the developers and artists working

It isn't even surprising that the Wii U isn't selling as well as the Wii did. They sold a lot of Wiis to people who don't buy games consoles. Those people will have gotten over the fad and won't be buying another games console. It's not that they're defecting to Sony or MS, they're just going back to their non-gaming ways.

But both are gimmick based. The Wii's gimmick was the motion controller. That interested a lot of people, they thought it looked really neat and wanted to try it. Of course you discovered that it wasn't quite as cool as it first seemed, and many games really didn't play that well with it, but it drove console sales pretty well. People liked the gimmick and wanted in, so that sold a lot of consoles at least initially.

However gimmicks are fickle things, and there's no guarantee of what people will be interested in. The Wii U's gimmick is a tablet. That just isn't working out. People aren't that interested. Makes sense, since most people who wish to have a tablet already have one in another form and a game console with a tablet isn't all that interesting.

It also made the price less attractive. That tablet isn't trivial cost wise, so Nintendo couldn't be quite as low priced. That was something else that helped the Wii. It was low cost enough compared to the other two to be interesting to people who didn't want to spend as much, as well as people to get it as an "and a" console in addition to whatever other one they liked. The Wii U wasn't quite as price competitive and so didn't see as much of that.

Basically Nintendo got lucky with the Wii. It was the right gimmick at the right time to catch on and sell a ton. This time around, they missed big time.

I dunno. The gamepad makes a some things far easier. The remake of Zelda: Wind Waker makes very good use of it for the maps. Sailing is so much easier when you can look down at the map and up at the view (kind of like sailing a real boat). Team management mode in FIFA13 is far easier to work on a touchscreen than with a controller. It's also very, very good for navigating menus, text input and all that stuff that's normally painful with a controller.

I suspect that the gamepad has two issues. The first is that it is a more traditional gaming setup. Yes, it has the gimmick of the screen and it does have motion sensors. On the other hand, it is very much a sit-down and play type controller. So while it does offer new forms of interaction for a home game console, it doesn't offer anything beyond a handheld game console. For the casual gamer who doesn't care about analog sticks, d-pads, and buttons, it doesn't offer anything beyond a smartphone or tabl

So you have something that may appeal to more traditional players, but it is in a low-end console (compared to the current generation). On top of that, the controller is driving up the price of that console quite significantly. Instead of having a low end console at half the price of its competitors, you have a low end console at 3/4ths the price of its competitors. Is it any wonder why it is a hard sell?

Except that it is still cheaper to manufacture than either the PS4 or XBox One.

Although the manufacturing contracts and specific details are not known, the estimate is that Wii U hardware is currently roughly net positive $350M. The XBox One hardware is approximately net loss of $350M, and the PS4 is approximately net loss of $750M. Sony and Microsoft are hoping losses will be recovered with software and online subscription fees to recover the losses, but Nintendo doesn't really need it since it is just ex

When you are making a profit on every unit and your competitor is making a loss on every unit, why would you object very much when the competitor takes the lead on number of units?

It depends. You allude to the big picture but never step back and take a look at it. Sony and Microsoft typically have taken a loss on the consoles specifically because they DO make a lot of money on games sales.

So if when the numbers are tallied MS and/or Sony are coming in higher net positive, then their strategy is still working better.

You allude to the big picture but never step back and take a look at it. Sony and Microsoft typically have taken a loss on the consoles specifically because they DO make a lot of money on games sales.

Ultimately all of them will make a lot of money. I never claimed they wouldn't.

As a game developer professionally, I love the competition. I want lots of game consoles. Since we're cross platform, I want all of them to have as many sales as they can. That's the good part for me and for everyone.

Last generation both Sony and Microsoft had a net loss on hardware sales that they never recouped in hardware. They took (and continue to take) profits from online subscriptions and other licensing.

So you have something that may appeal to more traditional players, but it is in a low-end console (compared to the current generation). On top of that, the controller is driving up the price of that console quite significantly. Instead of having a low end console at half the price of its competitors, you have a low end console at 3/4ths the price of its competitors. Is it any wonder why it is a hard sell?

Except that it is still cheaper to manufacture than either the PS4 or XBox One.

Although the manufacturing contracts and specific details are not known, the estimate is that Wii U hardware is currently roughly net positive $350M. The XBox One hardware is approximately net loss of $350M, and the PS4 is approximately net loss of $750M. Sony and Microsoft are hoping losses will be recovered with software and online subscription fees to recover the losses, but Nintendo doesn't really need it since it is just extra profit.

So even though by count the two devices are tied, the Wii U is over a half billion ahead of XBox One, and a billion more than the PS4.

Again: Hardware sales are tied, but Nintendo has a BILLION dollars more in net funding from race.

When you are making a profit on every unit and your competitor is making a loss on every unit, why would you object very much when the competitor takes the lead on number of units?

You might want to reign in that enthusiasm there. Nintendo has effectively called the WiiU a failure and isn't going to do anymore big games for it (beyond the current crop already in development). You're only counting the per console cost, what about R&D and the massive PR to get developers on board? They finally managed to get some good 3rd party studios on board seriously this time and still screwed the pooch. Guess how easy that's going to make it next time...

It's fine on a Wiimote plus Nunchuck: stick to steer/glide, Nunchuck buttons for item/horn and rear view, Wiimote buttons for accelerate/brake/drift. The only thing you lose over a pro controller is analog accelerate/brake with the second analog stick, but who bothers with that anyway?

I think it's more that we accepted that the motion control gimmick was first Gen, and expected the Wii 2, to have better motion control support. When it didn't, that blew away any reason to get a more expensive Wii.

Exactly. the wii was a fad console, which made a killing on sales, but they weren't the kind of gamers who continually paly the system and buy new games. With Micorsoft and Sony around though, that may be the best console-selling strategy for them. The alternative is going the Sega route. They'd make a killing that way.

We bought ours because of the titles...all of the gamers in my family are fans of the various Mario titles, and those were great on the Wii. The controller worked well and let you do things easily that would have been hard without the ability to point at stuff with the controller or shake it, etc.

The console had some big problems, though...most notably no real online community, a lack of HDMI support, not enough graphics processing power, and a shitty disc drive that failed in two units we owned, even thou

I actually like the tablet on the WiiU. With many games, it means that I can play a game while my wife watches TV. I can even take the tablet into another room (depending on distance/being able to communicate with the base unit) and play in there. The only downside is that it is one tablet per console. It would be great if you could buy additional tablets and connect them to the WiiU. Then you could play a multi-player game and let people have their own screen instead of splitting the TV's screen into m

The Wii controller was a bit better than a gimmick. It re-introduced the light gun in a way that works on modern plasma and LCD TVs, and in a way that can be part of a more elaborate control system. People loved the Zapper on the NES, but the games were pretty shallow because all you could do is pull the trigger.

If you played Metroid Prime with the Gamecube, and then the remade Wii version with the Wii controller, you'll find the Wii controller version is unquestionably better for the gaming experience,

The Wii was able to exploit a perfect storm of marketing. The novel motion controls garnered a lot of media buzz, and it certainly helped that it launched at half the price of the then new PS3 and XBox 360, while including a pack-in game, which made it a more convenient "single purchase" holiday gift. It's graphical shortcomings were excusable, at least for the first three or four years, given the low cost, novelty of motion controls, and the low market penetration of HDTV's at the time of its launch.

The Wii U has lots of problems - it's underpowered, it's overpriced, it has a confusing name, it lacks 3rd party support and consumers have grown fed up with gimmicks. I expect a lot of people who already own a PS3 or 360 look at the Wii U and wonder what is the point of the thing for a handful of exclusive titles (and little else). Casuals probably think of the Wii gathering dust in the cupboard.

Nintendo have to change their strategy, e.g. focus on the likes of China / India / Brazil where potentially they could carve out a larger market share. Or try doing a few cross platform games with some of their IP and see if its a viable revenue stream, e.g. a Pokemon game on tablets, or even an officially sanctioned emulator & store.

I agree XB1 isn't exactly intuitive and perhaps there is some confusion. However both XBox and Playstation have gone through several iterations so consumers are more likely to get the distinction than the Wii and Wii U.

And for gamers, the Wii U, while it does have several Mario title, still doesn't have a Legend of Zelda game, or a Metroid, or a Pokemon, etc.

It's missing most of the Nintendo Franchises that people buy a Nintendo brand console for. And now I've been hearing that Nintendo is already working on the Wii U's replacement console, looking bleak for the Wii U.

There's also an education issue at play. Calling it the "Wii U" is nice and all, but their primary customers are kinda clueless about gaming and don't understand that it's a new console.

I was talking with someone yesterday who continues to be an avid Wii user, and she was talking about possibly buying the new MarioKart game for herself and some other friends who she used to live with. I asked if they had a Wii U or not, to which I got a "Wii U? Isn't that just a Wii?" response. I explained that it was an en

>It isn't even surprising that the Wii U isn't selling as well as the Wii did. They sold a lot of Wiis to people who don't buy games consoles. Those people will have gotten over the fad and won't be buying another games console. It's not that they're defecting to Sony or MS, they're just going back to their non-gaming ways.

No. Their kids grew up and these days they get their older kids PCs because they need them for school work.

It isn't even surprising that the Wii U isn't selling as well as the Wii did. They sold a lot of Wiis to people who don't buy games consoles. Those people will have gotten over the fad and won't be buying another games console. It's not that they're defecting to Sony or MS, they're just going back to their non-gaming ways.

It doesn't take much effort to figure out that if you bought a Wii for your 9 year old in 2007, then you'll be upgrading to an Xbox or Ps4 in 2014 for your 16 year old. This is not a static audience...and the Wii is looking very old now to new 9 year olds with their android tablets.

Nintendo went from always being stronger than the competitor's hardware (SNES was stronger than the Genesis, N64 was technically stronger than the PSX) to being the weakest on the market.

That isn't really true. The SNES had a weaker CPU than the MegaDrive, but stronger graphics hardware to compensate. The N64 had strong CPU performance, but poor memory latency, very limited texture memory, and limited storage. The consoles back then had very different trade-offs.

I think that it is worth noting that the sales comparison is not lifetime sales, but sales for 2013 only. So, Nintendo's 2012 sales would not have been included.

The fact that the Wii U has been available for longer makes the PS4 2013 sales look even more lacklustre. All the consoles have their best sales immediately after launch (which is why having a good launch catalogue is critical). The Wii U was launched in late 2012, and it is unlikely that 2013 saw the kind of sales that it had in the first few months after launch. However, the PS4 was launched in 2013. So, when you compare sales data for 2013, you are comparing sales data of the latest and greatest that Sony has to offer with the sales performance of a console that most had already panned as being not worth the purchase.

The fact that the Wii U has been available for longer makes the PS4 2013 sales look even more lacklustre. All the consoles have their best sales immediately after launch (which is why having a good launch catalogue is critical).

By now you would expect Wii U to be into its stride, with a good catalogue and selling many consoles whereas PS4 is earlier in its cycle. (It's also higher priced, so you wouldn't expect it to sell as many units). Wii U is struggling when it should be doing well.

You mention something that isn't true. The Wii U different from other consoles - Nintendo relies almost entirely on first party development to sell consoles. Their biggest franchises, like Smash Bros. and Mario Kart, haven't even released yet. Their first year was almost entirely devoid of new releases from their franchises barring Mario. The Wii U obviously hasn't hit its' stride - but the reason is the wait for those killer games to provide the momentum for the console, not the other way around as what ty

Doesn't that make it even worse then? That Nintendo are responsible for making their console attractive... and they haven't yet, 18 months into its life. All the while they're losing ground to the more technically advanced competitors.

That one has. It's not even a particularly amazing entry in the series, though it has its moments. Nintendo's main source of innovation has been "same series, same plot, new mechanics", and cart racers, at least, seem to be very low on ideas for new mechanics.

That makes absolutely no sense. The PS4 has had the best console launch of all time. It only took it 3 or 4 months (with major supply issues) to sell what the WiiU did in 1 and a half year, and is now comfortably in the lead.

When the Wii launched, people lost their collective minds trying to obtain one. Stock was extremely limited and it was sold out everywhere despite being a glorified Gamecube with a gimmick controller. That's the power of a good launch.

The Wii U landed with a thud which wasn't helped by requiring a day-0 5GB patch. It had about 6 months to turn things around before the next-gen hype train started and it couldn't do it. At this point nothing short of a massive price drop, heavy promotion and money hats to 3rd parties could reinvigorate the platform in the West. Perhaps they should focus their attentions elsewhere.

At this point nothing short of a massive price drop, heavy promotion and money hats to 3rd parties could reinvigorate the platform in the West. Perhaps they should focus their attentions elsewhere.

I have read that Nintendo wants to cut the price but can't. The touchscreen pad apparently costs them just as much to produce now as it did at launch.

When the Wii was $250 and the PS3 was $500, that was a real price difference. Now the Wii U is $300 and the PS4 is $400. People are overwhelmingly choosing to spend the hundred bucks to get a much more powerful console with immensely better 3rd party support.

If I can buy a 7" tablet for $30 (and I can) then I'm not sure what Nintendo's excuse for their controller costing so much. I wouldn't put the bill of materials of their entire system to be more than $120. There should be at least some latitude to cut the price more than they have, particularly if the supply chain is filled with surplus stock.

I think that it is worth noting that the sales comparison is not lifetime sales, but sales for 2013 only. So, Nintendo's 2012 sales would not have been included.

The fact that the Wii U has been available for longer makes the PS4 2013 sales look even more lacklustre. All the consoles have their best sales immediately after launch (which is why having a good launch catalogue is critical). The Wii U was launched in late 2012, and it is unlikely that 2013 saw the kind of sales that it had in the first few months after launch. However, the PS4 was launched in 2013. So, when you compare sales data for 2013, you are comparing sales data of the latest and greatest that Sony has to offer with the sales performance of a console that most had already panned as being not worth the purchase.

You realize that the PS4 was only out for the last 6 weeks of 2013 in North America and last 5 weeks in Europe? And wasn't out in Japan until February 2014?

Even if Mario Kart sells well and gets some machines off the shelf, it's not like 3rd party developers will experience a moment of epiphany and line up up to produce exclusive triple A titles for the system. Where did this 'wunderwaffe' type of thinking come from?

I can't imagine some soulless CEO of EA slamming his desk, denouncing Sony/MS and rushing over to Japan to give Iwata a teary-eyed congratulatory blowjob because MK8 sold so well.

I've got a Wii U, and one of the most fun games for playing in a group is an EA title: FIFA 13. Up to five players, cooperative or competitive, all the leagues and players, recognisable faces. What's not to like? Seriously it's great, and the retailer threw it in as a freebie with the console, along with the pack-in Mario/Luigi platformers.

I've got Mario Kart 8 already. It's a lot simpler and more approachable than some of the previous titles (e.g. Mario Kart DS had a far steeper learning curve) - it fe

Even if Mario Kart 8 sold bucket loads, it would take 6-12 months for 3rd party games to turn up (what with all the porting, qa, marketing etc.) and sales could slump as fast in the meantime. Besides which I'm sure 3rd parties know as well as anyone that good sales of Mario Kart does not mean good sales of FIFA 15, AC V or whatever. After all the Wii had very impressive hardware sales and 3rd parties were still reduced to selling shovelware because the money wasn't in it to aim any higher.

Tell me about it, The Wii sold gangbusters and still no serious developer wanted to touch it. It practically had only first party games and tons of shovelware. Guess what, nobody bought the shovelware. On any other console, publishers would have said, "we are putting out crappy games that no one is buying" but because it is a Nintendo console, they just say, "See, no one buys games on a Nintendo console!" I am convinced that Nintendo could have a 99% market penetration and still no publisher would want to m

...and it might still have time to beat PlayStation 4 if the next Mario Kart makes people actually buy it...

This is what's wrong with Nintendo. Oh we'll put out another Maro Kart, then it'll be Super Smash Bros, then Zelda or Maria, then the other one, then back to start. They might throw a Metroid in there to spice things up now and again. They need a whole load more third party games not more of the same first party.

They need a whole load more third party games not more of the same first party.

No, that is what YOU want.Clearly Nintendo just needs to release a new Mario game and they magically beat everyone else.Nintendo have a slightly different target audience than the other consoles. They are a bit more like the Disney of gaming. It doesn't really matter that every title is pretty much the same as the last. They still have the large group of casual gamers together with a large bunch of the dedicated fans.

As long as Nintendo doesn't lose money on the hardware, I don't see a problem with them selling the console so that people can play 4 or 5 different games. I only had about 8 games for my original Nintendo because they were expensive. In reality I probably played about 4 of them 80% of the time. I have a Wii now and have got countless hours of entertainment out of around 4 games. I've heard a lot of good stuff about Mario Kart 8 and I will probably buy a Wii U.

Although they do have more 3rd party developers, Sony and Microsoft also depend upon the same rehashed thing over and over. The major games are one FPS after another with the only thing changing being the theater where the battle or special ops is being carried out, or yet another EA-like sports game with (except for updated rosters) minor changes between versions (do you really think FIFA 14 is so much different than 13, or 12, or...?).

Like you, I think that the Wii U is easily the best of the current generation. Easily. Why? When I get home, my wife and three daughters will be playing Mario Kart, Wii U Party, Nintendo Land, or Just Dance on any other day. Only one of those can be played on another console. On any given day, my youngest daughter will win some of these games (without anyone letting her). There is no first-person shooter, real sports game, or real racing game, that any of them are interested in. And if one of my daughters is playing Wind Waker, and my wife wants to watch TV, then my daughter just switches to the pad, and puts on the headphones. And we bought it because we KNOW there is going to be a Pikmin, a Smash Bros, a Mario, a Mario Kart, a Wario Ware, and hopefully a Zelda and Metroid in the pipeline. And in HD, they will look sensational (as Pikmin, Wind Waker, MK8, 3D World already do).

Every now and then, I would prefer to play some mega-shootin', zombie-killin', big boss fightin' titles. However I'm the only one in the house that would enjoy them. But if I wanted, I can go pick up COD, or Batman. Even Watch Dogs and Bayonetta are on the way. That's options for me too - if I don't feel like playing MK8 or Pikmin (which is rare). That's a bonus.

There are millions of households like this. The other console makers haven't QUITE caught on yet. Bless 'em, I'm sure they will one day!:)

The other consoles are great. Second Son on the PS4, Titanfall on the 'Bone, looking and playing brilliantly. The Wii U is better, in my opinion, and also cheaper.

The Wii U has good games. The problem is there are few of them because 3rd parties are ignoring the platform. It hasn't sold enough to make games profitable, lacks much storage for DLC or other revenue generators and there is little love lost between them and Nintendo to begin with. I doubt Mario Kart 8 will turn things around either though it might allow them to clear some of their stock and stabilise things a bit.

I purchased almost every Nintendo console up until the Wii. I grew up on the original Nintendo and Super Nintendo. Stopped at the Wii.

Nintendo's marketing after the Wii was not effective. They should fire whoever named the console, and especially since they named the follow up console "Wii U". I didn't even know that the Wii U was so much different & better than the Wii.

Nintendo needs to wake up and smell the coffee. They should title their next console with "Nintendo" in it, to get all the nostal

I think the root cause should be looked at why they have bad marketing. IMHO: the senior management staff is getting old an inflexible. Iwata can't even come to E3 because of health concerns. Nintendo as a whole is no longer flexible enough to meet market demands and users want. When have they release a good game where they truly innovate? It seems like all they want to do is farm out their game to child studio's and have them make just enough changes to sell s few copies. The Mario Kart is the perfec

I agree with this statement, but for a different reason. I have a Wii U and a 3DS, and none of the competitors'. Google knows that very well due to searches and through the websites I visit. Yet, I only see ads for the other systems, and PC games (my gaming laptop is more than 3 years old, so every "recent" game has to be on lowest settings to be playable... so I don't play on it).

Maybe they are too full of themselves and think they don't need to make the effort? Maybe they don't really understand how to us

Nintendo know kids and families love them, so they only really worry about that market. The hardcore gamers who scoff at Nintendo's "kidified" experience are also a lot more vocal that housewives and 7 year olds and post a lot more about it online, so they get more "visibilty" that the folks who just play the games and don't spend most of their lives talking about about the games or praising what they like and scourging what they don't...

Yeah, well I used a Wii U console and then I got laid; my dick definitely didn't fall off. I guess that means the Wii U solves the major issue you encountered with the Wii. Did you manage to get your dick reattached? If you did, I can assure you the Wii U is safe to use. And if you didn't, then I guess it really doesn't matter which console you use.

The PS4 has Transistor( a ridiculously addicting rpg) and Mercenary Kings (Contra & Metal Slug type game). That alone is worth having the PS4 and should tide you over until the next group of indy games roll out. Major titles will become more available in 2015, but the PSN/Indy scene is going to be killing it in 2014.

Bad examples. Transistor and Mercenary Kings are both on Steam, as is pretty much every indie game of consequence. In fact, what most indie developers are learning is that they get more sales on Steam than they ever did on the consoles - and Steam will allow them to support their games past release without placing stupid restrictions on it.

This is one of the reasons I don't plan on buying any current gen consoles.

Not only that, but on the WiiU front, Nintendo has released the first game I might actually be interested in for the WiiU, but I'm not about to shell out a bunch of money just for one game.

To add to this, the WiiU's other big upcoming title (Smash Bros.) is also going to be on the 3DS... which nearly all my friends already have. As opposed to the two of them who have WiiU consoles.

I think they may get more "sales" but less revenue.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05... [joystiq.com]
In the above some of the delelopers made more money on psn because they sold more games at full price.
I think there may be a bit of an Apple/Android effect going on. Where console gamers are more willing to spend money than steam gamers.
(generalization as many steam users are console users)